uva-dare (digital academic repository) clause structure in old … · on twam pingum hasfde god...

UvA-DARE is a service provided by the library of the University of Amsterdam (http://dare.uva.nl)

UvA-DARE (Digital Academic Repository)

Clause structure in Old English

Ohkado, M.

Link to publication

Citation for published version (APA):Ohkado, M. (2005). Clause structure in Old English.

General rightsIt is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s),other than for strictly personal, individual use, unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons).

Disclaimer/Complaints regulationsIf you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please let the Library know, statingyour reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Askthe Library: https://uba.uva.nl/en/contact, or a letter to: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam,The Netherlands. You will be contacted as soon as possible.

Download date: 08 Nov 2020

https://dare.uva.nl/personal/pure/en/publications/clause-structure-in-old-english(8b5c68e7-616e-43b6-ac35-aa24b5c715c2).html

Chapterr 6

Thee Position of Subject Pronouns and Finite Verbs in Old English*

1.. Introduction

Itt has been pointed out in the literature that the syntactic behavior of Old English pronouns

differss from that of full NPs, and that sentences involving the former should be treated

separatelyy from sentences involving the latter. Van Kemenade (1987) was the first to

presentt a systematic account for the peculiar behavior of Old English pronouns in terms of

thee notion of cliticization. Although her basic idea is widely accepted by scholars working

onn Old English syntax within the framework of generative grammar, specific details of their

analysess are not necessarily the same. A notable counterproposal to van Kemenade's

(1987)) analysis is the one proposed in Pintzuk (1991, 1999). In an article published in

1999,, van Kemenade modifies her former analysis and proposes that Old English pronouns

occupyy the specifier of a functional projection generated between C and T. In this paper, I

wil ll focus on the behavior of subject personal pronouns in Old English and show that in

mainn clauses with inversion and in subordinate clauses, they should be analyzed as

cliticizedd to the right periphery of C, as originally proposed in van Kemenade (1987). I

wil ll also explore a possibility to apply the analysis to main clauses without inversion.

2.. Previous analyses of subject clitic pronouns in Old English

2.11 Van Kemenade (1987)

Vann Kemenade (1987) proposes the following four positions that clitic pronouns may

occupy.1 1

170 0

Thee Position of Subject Pronouns and Finite Verbs 171

(1) )

SPEC C

Notee that van Kemenade (1987) assumes a somewhat anomalous structure, and that in

(1),, her structure is reinterpreted in the more standard barrier-type analysis (cf. Chomsky

(1986)). .

Thee crucial position for the present analysis is 'cl2,' the right periphery of C. This

positionn is exemplified by subject personal pronouns in main clause V2 sentences with

Subject-Verb-Inversion,, as shown in (2).

(2)) a. Hwast saegest b_u yrblincg? Hu begaist b_u weorc bin?

'whatt do you say, ploughman? How do you go about your work?'

(AColl.,, 22/van Kemenade (1987: 138))

b.. ba wearö he to deofle awend

thenn was he to devil changed

1722 Clause Structure in Old English

'thenn he was changed to a devil' (AHTh, I, 12/ibid.)

Inn (2), the operator elements, hwxt and hu in (2a), and pa in (2b), occupy the specifier of

CP,, the finite verbs occupy the C-position, and the personal pronominal subjects are

cliticizedd to the C. In this analysis, clitics are zero-level elements and are attached to a

zero-levell category, C.

2.22 Pintzuk (1991,1999)

Pintzukk (1999) argues that clitics in Old English are phrasal affixes and they attach to the

rightt or left periphery of the Specifier of IP as illustrated in (3).

(3)) a. IP b. IP

/ \\ y\ Specc I' Spec I'

/ \\ / \ cll Spec Spec cl

Differingg from van Kemenade (1987), who assumes that finite verbs in main clauses

uniformlyy occupy the C-position, Pintzuk (1991, 1999) argues that only finite verbs in

clausess with obligatory inversion (interrogative clauses, clauses introduced by ne,

imperativee or optative clauses, and clauses introduced by certain adverbs such as pa 'then')

occupyy the C-position. Finite verbs in other contexts are analyzed as occupying the I

position.. In clauses with no Subject-Verb-Inversion, subjects occupy the specifier of IP,

andd in clauses with Subject-Verb-Inversion, subjects occupy their base position, the

specifierr of VP, and the specifier of IP is occupied by the fronted topic elements. These

differencess between van Kemenade's (1987) and Pintzuk's (1991, 1999) analyses are

illustratedd in (4).


(4)) a. Main Clauses with Operator

Vann Kemenade (1987) Pintzuk (1991, 1999)

CPP CP

SPEC C

Operatorr C IP P

SPEC C

Operatorr C IP P

Verbb SPEC I' Verbb SPEC I'

b.. Main Clauses without Operators (without Inversion)


CPP CP

SPEC C

Subjectt C

C' ' SPEC C C' '

IP P IP P

Verbb SPEC I' SPECC I'

Subjectt ...Verb..


c.. Main Clauses without Operators (with Inversion)


CPP CP

SPEC C

Topic c

SPEC C

IP P

Verbb SPEC

C C

IP P

SPEC C

Topicc ...Verb...

2.33 Van Kemenade (1999)

Vann Kemenade (1999) modifies her previous analysis and proposes that the clause structure

off Old English is (6) and that personal pronouns occupy the specifier of the functional

categoryy F.


(5)) CP

/ / Spec c

Vfinn FP

Spec c

FF NegP

Vfinn / \

Specc Neg'

-- / \ Negg TP

ne-Vfinn / \

Specc T'

Subjj y A ^ TT VP

Vfin n

Spec c

Thee structure in (5) is intended to account for the fact that a negating particle na cannot

intervenee between the finite verb and a personal pronoun subject. Observe the contrast

betweenn examples with nominal and pronominal subjects in (6).

(6)) a. bonne ne mint bu rm past mot ut ateon of öaes mannes

thenn not could you not the speck out draw of the man's

eagan n

eye e


'thenn you could not draw the speck out of the man's eye'

0eiomP.XIII.153/vann Kemenade (1999: 149))

b.. Ne biö na se leorningcniht furöor bonne his lareow

nott is not the apprentice further than his master

'Thee apprentice is not ahead of his master' (/EhomP.XIII. 134/ibid.)

Inn these examples, the finite verb occupies the C position. Since the negating particle na

occupiess the position below F, to which personal pronouns move, subject personal pronouns

neverr follow the negating particle, as illustrated in (6a). In contrast, nominal subjects

occupyy the specifier of T, which is below the position where na is generated, and as a result,

naa intervenes between the finite verb and nominal subject as illustrated in (6b).

Thee F position is a landing site of finite verbs in constructions with topic fronting and is

intendedd to account for the contrast observed in (7).

(7)) a. On twam pingum hasfde God baes mannes sawle gegodod

inn two things had God the man's soul endowed

'Withh two things God had endowed man's soul'

0Ehom.i.20.1/vann Kemenade (1999: 154))

b.. Be öaem we magon suide swutule oncnawan öaet...

byy that we may very clearly preceive that

'byy that, we may perceive very clearly that...'

(CP.181.16/vann Kemenade (1999: 156))

Inn topic fronting constructions, when nominal subjects are involved, subject-verb inversion

generallyy takes place as illustrated in (7a). On the other hand, when pronominal subjects

aree involved, they always precede the finite verb as illustrated in (7b). In these examples,

thee finite verbs are analyzed as occupying the F position. Since subject personal pronouns

aree moved to the specifier of F, they always precede the finite verb. In contrast, nominal

subjects,, which remian in the specifier of TP, follow the finite verb.

Ass pointed out by Kato (1995), van Kemenade (1987)'s analysis and Pintzuk (1991,

http://0eiomP.XIII.153/van


1999)'ss analysis make different predictions with respect to whether elements can intervene

betweenn the finite verb and subject in main clauses with Subject-Verb-Inversion: In van

Kemenadee (1987)'s analysis, no elements are expected to intervene between the finite verb

andd pronominal subject since the latter are cliticized to the former. In contrast, in

Pintzuk'ss (1991,1999) approach, elements should be allowed to intervene between the finite

verbb and the personal pronominal subject because the latter is attached to the following

specifierr of IP, but not the preceding C.

Thesee two approaches also make different predictions with respect to the behavior of

pronominall subjects in subordinate clauses.

Bothh in van Kemenade's (1987) and Pintzuk's analyses, complementizers occupy the C

position.. However, since subject personal pronouns are adjoined to the C position in van

Kemenade'ss analysis, no elements are expected to intervene between the complementizer

andd the pronominal subjects. On the other hand, in Pintzuk's (1991, 1999) analysis,

pronominall subjects are adjoined to the specifier of IP, so that elements are expected to

intervenee between the complementizer and pronominal subjects.

Withh respect to the possibility of element intervention between the finite

verb/complementizerr and pronominal subjects, van Kemenade's new approach make the

samee prediction as Pintzuk's, if FP is a projection that allows other elements to attach to it.

Vann Kemenade (1999) does not say anything concerning the possibility of adjunction to FP,

butbut since functional projections such as CPs allow adjunction as demonstrated in Kiparsky

(1995:: 147), who presents the example in (8), there does not seem to be any principled

reasonn to prohibit the possibility. Therefore, let us assume that van Kemenade's (1999)

analysiss also allows elements to intervene between the finite verb/complementizer and

pronominall subject.

(8)) beah be we bas ping cwepe, ne tellad we synne weosan gesinscipe

Thoughh we say these things, we do not count wedlock as sin' (Bede 1.18, p.82)

Thee predictionss made by the three approaches are summarized in (9).

1788 Clause Structure In Old English

(9)) a. Operator-Vf-X-SUBpro...

ungrammaticall in van Kemenade's (1987) analysis

grammaticall in van Kemenade's (1999) and Pintzuk's (1991, 1999) analyses

b.. Complementizer-X-SUBpro...

ungrammaticall in van Kemenade's (1987) analysis

grammaticall in van Kemenade's (1999) and Pintzuk's (1999) analyses

Inn the following section, I will examine which of the two predictions is the correct one.

3.. Analysis

3.11 Kato (1995)

Usingg the data from the Old English Concordance (Healey and Venezky (1980)), Kato

(1995)) examined the distribution of the interjection la 'lo, oh,' and found that, while la can

intervenee between the finite verb and the inverted full NP subject, it cannot intervene

betweenn the finite verb and inverted personal pronominal subject. The relevant figures

fromm Kato (1995) are given in (10), where "SUBpro" and "SUB" stand for personal pronoun

subjectss and full noun subjects, respectively.

(10)) Interrogative Clauses VI Imperative/Optatives Verb 1 Declaratives

Vf-SUBpro-laa 28 3 0

Vf-la-SUBproo 0 0 0

Vf-SUB-laa 2 2 2

Vf-la-SUBB 9 1 0

Fromm these figures, Kato (1995: 36) concludes that "it can be safely claimed...that subject

pronounss are encliticized to the fronted Vf in interrogative/verb-first constructions."

Kato'ss (1995) conclusion is a statement concerning possible intervening elements

betweenn the finite verb and the inverted personal pronominal subjects, but his data is

restrictedd to a single element, the interjection la. It is obvious that, for his conclusion to be


supported,, the data should be expanded to include all the potential intervening elements and

itt should be shown that, while various elements may intervene between the finite verb and

invertedd full NP subjects, no elements can intervene between the finite verb and pronominal

subjects.. To examine the validity of Kato's (1995) conclusion, I have exhaustively

analyzedd main clause examples in the first series of jElfric's Catholic Homilies (Thorpe's

edition).. I have also analyzed all the subordinate clauses in the same text, since, as shown

inn the preceding section, the two approaches of van Kemenade (1987) on the one hand, and

vann Kemenade (1999) and Pintzuk (1991, 1999) on the other, make different predictions

withh respect to the separability of the complementizer and pronominal subjects.

3.22 Main Ctaues

Thee result of the investigation of main clauses is given in (11), where, again, "SUBpro" and

"SUB"" stand for peronal pronoun subject and full noun subject, respectively.

(11)) Intervening Elements between the Finite Verb and the Subject in Main Clauses

a.. Ordinary Main Clauses with Inversion

VV SUB 861

VXSUBB 114

VV SUBp 227

VV X SUBp 0

b.. Clauses Introduced by the Negating Particle ne.

VV SUB 147

VV X SUB 27

VSUBpp 110

VV X SUBp 0

c.. Interrogative Clauses

VV SUB 55

VV X SUB 2

VSUBpp 71


VV X SUBp 0

d.. Imperative/Optative Clauses

VV SUB 56

VV X SUB 8

VV SUBp 78

VV X SUBp 0

Thee figures in (11) clearly show that irrespective of the status of the clause no element

cann intervene between the finite verb and the pronominal subject, whereas intervention is

quitee common in clauses with full NP subjects. This result suggests that pronominal

subjectss are cliticized to the preceding finite verb, which is analyzed as occupying the C

position.. The intervening elements in clauses with full NP subjects can be analyzed as

adjoinedd to IP as illustrated in (12).

(12)) [Cp[c'Vf[ipX[ IpSUB....]]]]

Heree I assume that the negating particle na in (5), which is analyzed as occupying the

specifierr of Neg in van Kemenade (1999), is adjoined to IP, just like other intervening

elements,, because non-negative elements also exhibits the same patterns as observed in (6),

ass illustrated in (13) and (14).4

(13)) a. nis heo hwaedere öe geliccre (teere ecan worulde

not-iss it nevertheless more like (to) the eternal world

'nevertheless,, it (this world) is no more like the eternal world'

GECHomI,, 154. 17-18)

b.. Da waes hwxfrere an man rihtwis aetforan Gode

menn was nevertheless one man righteous before God

'Nevertheless,, there was one man righteous before God' ( ECHom I, 20. 25-26)


(14)) a. Hwi ne sceal he donne rihtlice wrecan baet yfel ban he

whyy not shall he then justly avenge the evil which he

onscunaö? ?

Abominates s

'Whyy then shall he not justly avenge the evil which he abominates'

(jECHomm I, 114. 4-5)

b.. hwaet deö ponne seo öreotteoöe maeigö, Leui?

whatt does then the thirteenth tribe Levi

'then,, what does the thirteenth tribe, Levi, do?" OECHom I, 396. 3-4)

Otherr adverbs that show the same pattern are eac, eft, fordi, nu, oft, öaer, da-git, and deah.

Anotherr point which is worth mentioning here is that, as far as the status of intervening

elementss is concerned, there does not seem to be any difference between examples with

operatorss and those without them. Consider the examples in (15)-(17).

(15)) a. To öisum twam endebyrdnyssum cwed ponne se rihtwisa Dema

too these two classes said then the righteous judge

Too these two classes the righteous Judge will then say' (JECHom 1,396. 30-31)

b.. Be bisum cwaeö eac se Haelend on oöre stowe to his

aboutt these said also the healer in another place to his

leorning-cnihtum m

disciples s

'Jesuss also said about these in another place to his disciples'

OECHomm I, 554-556. 35-1)

(16)) a. Par stodon da ma ponne twentig dusend manna mid

theree stood then more than twenty thousand (of) men with

Egeass breöer

jEgeas'ss brother


'Moree than twenty thousand men stood there with yEgeas's brother'

( ECHomm I, 596. 22-23)

b.. swa eac hearmaöe öin gewinn togeanes me

soo also harms you your warfare against me

'soo also your warfare against me harms you' OECHom I, 390. 11)

(17)) Wulf bid eac se unrihtwisa rica

wolff is also the unrihteous powerful-man

Thee unrighteous powerful man also is a wolf (jECHom I, 242. 3)

Thee examples in (15a) and (15b) are introduced by argument PPs. The example in (16a) is

introducedd by an argument adverb. The example in (16b) is introduced by a non-operator

adverb.. The example in (17) is introduced by a predicate NP. The intervening elements

aree bonne in (15a), £g£ in (15b) and (17), b_a in (16a), and a personal pronoun in (16b) and

thesee elements can all appear in examples where inversion is analyzed as triggered by

operatorss as illustrated in (18) (cf. Pintzuk (1999)).

(18)) a. hwset deö ponne seo öreotteoöe mseigö, Leui?(=(14b))


'then,, what does the thirteenth tribe, Levi, do?" (jECHom I, 396. 3-4)

b.. Wite eac gehwa, baet aelc man haefö preo öing on him sylfum

knoww also everyone that every man has three things in himself

untodseledlicee and togaedere wyrcende, swa swa God cwaed, papa he

indivisiblee and together working as God said when he

aerestt mann gesceop

firstt man created

'Lett everyone know that every man has three things in himself indivisible and

workingg together, as God said when he first created man'

OECHomm I, 288. 11-13)


c.. Nu com da seo eadige Maria to his huse

noww came then the blessed Mary to his house

'Noww the blessed Mary came to his house' (vECHom I, 202. 8-9)

d.. Drihten Haelend, nis de nan ding earfode

Lordd healer not-is (to) you no thing difficult

'Lordd Jesus, nothing is difficult to you' OECHom I, 62. 10-11)

Thee examples in (15)-(18) suggest that inversion constructions with operators and those

withh topic elements are to be analyzed in parallel fashion as illustrated in (19).

(19)) a. clauses with operators

[cpp Operator [c Vf-pronoun {eeponndeadpa [n> SUB . . .. ]]] ]

b.. clauses with topic elements

[cpp Topic [c Vf-pronoun [n> ponne/eae/pa [n> SUB ]]] ]

Notee that the examples with intervening pronouns in (17b) and (18d) receive uniform

analysiss under the present assumption that clauses with and without operators are

structurallyy parallel: The intervening pronouns in these examples are analyzed as cliticized

too the C position. If the position of finite verbs in clauses with topic elements are analyzed

differentlyy from that of finite verbs in clauses with operators, as in van Kemenade (1999)

andd Pintzuk (1991, 1999), we should assume at least two clitic positions for the two parallel

structures.. This can be another argument against van Kemenade's (1999) and Pintzuk's

(1991,1999)) approaches.

3.3SiibordiiiateCLuKs s

Thee result of the investigation of subordinate clauses is given in (20).

(20)) Intervening Elements between the Complementizer and the Subject

COMPSUBVV 1184

COMPP X SUB V 84

COMPSUBpVV 2411


COMPP X SUBp V 8

Seemingly,, the data given in (20) support van Kemenade's (1999) and Pintzuk's (1991,

1999)) analysis, and not van Kemenade's (1987) because they apparently show that elements

cann intervene between the complementizer and pronominal subjects as well as between the

complementizerr and full NP subject. Closer examinations of the relevant data, however,

reveall that it is not the case. (21) gives all the examples of personal pronominal subjects

withh intervening elements.

(21)) a. Be by sum taehte se apostol Paulus, "Pa de wif

Concerningg this taught the apostle Paul those who wives

habbad,, beon hi swilce hi nan nabbon;" foröan ealle

havee be they as-though they none not-had for all

hyrahyra unlustas hi sceolon gebetan sylfwylles on pyssum life,

theirr evil-lusts they should atone voluntarily in this life

oööee unpances aefter dyssum life

orr involuntarily after this life

'Concerningg this the apostle Paul taught, "Let those who have wives be as

thoughh they had none." For they shall atone for all their evil lusts voluntarily in

thiss life, or involuntarily after this life;' GECHom I, 148. 25-28)

b.. Paöa he ferde, pa gehyrde he paes blindan clypunge; and

whenn he passed then heard he (of) the blind's cry and

papaa he stod, pa forgeaf he him gesihde; foröan purh da

whenn he stood then gave he him sight because through the

menniscnyssemenniscnysse he besargad ures modes blindnysse, and öurh

human-naturee he bewails (of) our mind's blindness and through

daa godcundnysse he forgifd us leoht, and ure blindnysse onliht.

thee divine-nature he gives us light and our blindness enlightens

'Whenn he was passing he heard the blind man's cry; and when he stood he gave

himm sight; because through his human nature he bewails the blindness of our


minds,, and through his divine nature he gives us light, and enlightens our

blindness.'' (iECHom I, 158. 6-10)

c.. Ne getimode bam apostole Thome unforsceawodlice, baet he

Nott happened (to) the apostle Thomas unprovidentially that he

ungeleaffull waes Cristes aeristes, ac hit getimode burn

unbelievingg was (of) Christ's resurrection but it happened through

Godess forsceawunge; foröan durft his grapunge we sind

God'ss providence for through his touching we are

geleaffulle. .

believing g

'Itt happened to the apostle Thomas not unprovidentially, that he was

unbelievingg of Christ's resurrection, but it happened by the providence of God;

forr through his touching we are believing.' (JECHom I, 234. 19-22)

d.. For nahte he tealde aenig ding to biddenne buton gesihöe;

forr naught he accounted any thing to pray but sight

foröann deah se blinda sum ding haebbe, he ne maeg butan

becausee though the blind some thing have he not may without

leohtee geseon baet he haefö.

lightt see that-which he has

'Forr naught he accounted it to pray for anything but sight; because, though the

blindd may have something, he cannot without light see that which he has.'

OECHomI,, 158.21-24)

e.. Ure Alysend Crist naes geferod mid craete ne durh

ourr Redeemer Christ not-was conveyed with chariot nor by

englaa fultum; foröan se de ealle ding geworhte, he waes geferod

angels'' help for he who all things wrought he was borne

midd his agenre mihte ofer ealle gesceafta.

byy his own might over all creatures

'Ourr Redeemer Christ was not conveyed in a chariot nor by angels' help; for he


whoo wrought all things was borne by his own might over ail creatures.'

OECHomm I, 308. 12-15)

f.. ï>a öe God lufiad, hi sind gemanode baet hi gladion on

Thosee who God loves they are exhorted that they be-glad in

middangeardess geendunge, foröan pome he gewit, öe

world'ss ending for when it passe s-away which

hii ne lufodon, Sonne witodlice hi gemetaö pone öe hi

theyy not loved then certainly they find that which they

lufodon. .

loved d

Thosee whom God loves are exhorted to be glad for the ending of the world,

forr when that passes away, which they loved not, then certainly they will find

thatt which they loved.' OECHom I, 612. 16-18)

g.. Se eadiga martyr öa was biddende his Drihten, and cwaeö,

thee blessed martyr then was praying (to) his Lord and said

"Haelendd Crist, God of Gode, gemiltsa binum deowan,

Saviorr Christ God of God have-mercy (on) your servant

foröann öe ie gewreged öe ne wiösoc, befrinen ie öe

forr I accused you not denied questioned I you

geandette." "

acknowledged d

'Thee blessed martyr then was praying to his Lord, and said, "Saviour Christ,

Godd of God, have mercy on thy servant, for, accused, I denied thee not;

questioned,, I acknowledged thee." OECHom I, 426.1 -4)

h.. Mid bam öe hi andwyrdon, "Amen,"ba wearö eall seo untrume

whenn they answered Amen then was all the sick

meniguu gehsled: and öaer com öa fleogende Godes engel

multitudee healed and there came then flying God's angel


seinendee swa swa sunne, and fleah geond da feower hwemmas

shiningg as sun and flew over the four corners

baess temples, and agrof mid his fingre rode-tacn on dam

(of)) the temple and graved with his finger cross-sign on the

fyöerscytumm stanum, and cwaed, "Se God öe me sende cwaeö,

four-corneredd stones and said The God who me sends said

Pastt swa swa das untruman synd gehselede fram eallum codum,

thatt as these sick are healed from all diseases

swaswa he geclaensode pis tempi fram baes deofles fulnyssum,

soo he cleansed this temple from (of) the devil's foulness

öoneöee se apostol het to westene gewitan.

whomm the apostle commanded to waste retire

'Whilee they were answering "Amen," all the sick multitude was healed: and

theree came then flying God's angel shining as the sun, and flew over the four

cornerss of the temple, and graved with his finger the sign of the cross on the

four-corneredd stones, and said, "The God who sendeth me said, That so as

thesee sick are healed from all diseases, so hath he cleansed this temple from

thee devil's foulness, whom the apostle hath commanded to retire to the waste.'

GECHomI,466.. 10-18)

Whatt is crucially important here is that all the examples in (21) are cases where then-

statuss as subordinate clauses is controversial. A group of subordinators in Old English are

identicall in form with corresponding adverbs, and it is sometimes difficut to make

main/subordinatee distinction (cf. Bammersberger (1992: 62)). Fordan 'for' in (21a)-(21f) is

ann example of such ambiguous cases, and it can be claimed that the clauses introduced by

fordanfordan in (2la)-(2If) are actually main clauses. (2In) involves a complement clause of a

bridgee verb, which can be regarded as embedded main clauses, as argued in Hulk and van

Kemenadee (1995), van Kemenade (1997), and Ohkado (2000). (21 g) involves a fordan öe

clause,, which can be an embedded main clause, as argued in Ohkado (2000). There are no


subordinatee clause examples with intervening elements between finite the verb and

pronominall subject, which are introduced by genuine subordinators.

Inn contrast, genuine subordinate clauses with full NP subjects frequently allow

interveningg elements to be placed between the complementizer and subject as illustrated in

(22). .

(22)) a. Gif donne se cristena man swa deö for Godes lufon

iff then the christian man so does for God's love

'Iff the christian man does so for love of God' OECHom I, 142. 15)

b.. fordan de se eadmoda heap geeamode aet Gode pst in xr

forr the humble company merited of God that long before

baett modige werod forleas

thee proud host lost

'forr the humble company merited of God that which long ago the proud host

hadd lost' OECHom 1,318.13-14)

Gif'i ff in (22a) is a genuine subordinator and the pxt clause in (22b) is a free relative clause.

Thesee clauses cannot be analyzed as embedded main clauses. This difference between

clausess with pronominal subjects and those with full NP subjects suggests that pronominal

subjectss in genuine subordinate clauses are cliticized to the preceding complementizer so

thatt no elements can intervene.

Itt should be pointed out that sometimes the same elements as in main clauses with

inversionn appear as intervening elements as illustrated in (23)-(27).

(23)) forweloft

a.. We raedaö gehwaer on bocum, baet forwel oft englas comon to

wee read everywhere in books that very often angels came to

godraa manna forösiöe

(of)) good men departure

'Wee read here and there in books, that very often angels came at the departure

Thee Position of Subject Pronouns and Finite Vert» 189

off good men' (iECHom I, 440. 33)

b.. For gehealdsumnysse sodre eadmodnysse beod forwel oft

forr preservation (of) true humility are very often

Godess gecorenan geswencte

God'ss chosen afflicted

'Forr preservation of true humility God's chosen are very often afflicted'

(yECHomm I, 474. 10-11)

(24)) fwpoa

a.. Na on forliger-beddum and on unclaennyssum, ac beo arwyrde

nott in adulteries and in uncleannesses but be honorable

sinscipee betwux gelyfedum mann, swa pact furdon nan forliger

unionn between believing persons so that further no adultery

nee unclaennyss ne sy genemned on Godes geladunge

norr uncleanness not be named in God's church

'Nott in adulteries and uncleannesses, but let there be honorable union between

believingg persons, so that at least no adultery nor uncleanness be named in

God'ss church' (yECHom I, 604. 29-32)

b.. E»eah her waron gebohte twa hund pening-wurd hlafes, ne

thoughh here were bought two hundred pennyworth (of) bread not

mihtee furdon hyra aelc anne bitan of dam gelaeccan

couldd further their each one morsel of them get

Thoughh two hundred pennyworth of bread were bought, yet everyone of them

couldd not get a morsel' (vECHom I, 182. 9-11)

(25)) pser

a.. ac öa gytsigendan ealdor-biscopas geöafedon ban ÖXT cyping

butt the covetous high-priests allowed that there chapping

binnann gehaefd wacre


withinn had were

'butt the covetous high-priests allowed chapping to be held therein'

(iECHomm I, 406. 5-6)

b.. t>a com dxr an earm wudewe, and geoffrode Gode aenne

thenn came there a poor widow and offered (to) God one

feoröling g

farthing g

Thenn a poor widow came there, and offered to God one farthing'

OECHomm I, 582. 14-15)

(26)) ponne

a.. swilce donne his to-cyme mancynne bediglod waere

as-iff then his advent (from) mankind hidden were

'ass if his advent were then hidden from mankind' (^ECHom I, 82. 29-30)

b.. hwau ded ponne seo öteotteoöe maeigö, Leui?(=(14b))


'then,, what does the thirteenth tribe, Levi, do?' OECHom I, 396. 3-4)

(27)) pronoun

a.. peah de him nan ding digle ne sy

thoughh (from) him no thing hidden not is

'thoughh nothing is hidden from him' (jECHom I, 518. 6-7)

b.. towurpe de se /Elmihtiga Godes Sunu

overthroww you the Almighty God's Son

'mayy the Almighty Son of God overthrow you' (/ECHom 1,420. 11)

Thiss parallelism can be accounted for by the assumption that in subordinate clauses as well

ass in main clauses, the intervening elements other than pronouns, which are analyzed as

cliticizedd to the C position, are adjoined to IP as illustrated in (28).

(28)) a. main clauses


[CPP ...[c Vf-pronoun [n> forwelofttfurpoalpxrlponne [n> SUB . . . . ] ] ] ]

b.. subordinate clauses

[CPP [c COMP-pronoun [n» forwel ofiffwpon/txet/poiwe [n» SUB ]]] ]

4.. A Note on Man Onset without L m n k n

Inn the preceding section I have argued that pronominal subjects in main clauses with

inversionn and those in subordinate clauses are cliticized to the C position. In this section I

wil ll briefly consider the position of pronominal subjects in main clauses without inversion.

Vann Kemenade's (1987) analysis, which makes the correct prediction in main clauses

withh inversion and in subordinate clauses, cannot deal with main clauses without inversion.

Ass we have seen in section 2.1, in van Kemenade's (1987) system, pronominal subjects in

mainn clauses without inversion are analyzed as cliticized to the left periphery of C, which is

illustratedd in (29).

(29)) a. [cp[cSUBp-Vf[iP ]]]

b.. [cpXP[cSUBp-Vf[lP ]]]

(29a)) illustrates examples in which pronominal subjects occupy initial position and (29b)

illustratess examples with topic elements. This analysis, which predicts that no element can

intervenee between pronominal subjects and finite verbs, is untenable since examples with

interveningg elements are frequently observed as illustrated in (30).

(30)) a. Ic symle geoffrode, and gyt offrige mine lac dam iElmihtigan

II ever offered and yet offer my gift (to) the almighty

Gode e

God d

'II have ever offered and will yet offer my gift to the Almighty God"

(iECHomI,416.. 16-17)

1922 Clause Structure In Old English

b.. sume he purh graman totwaemö

somee he through anger divides

'hee divides some (of them) through anger' OECHom I, 240. 26)

Theree are a number of ways to deal with these examples. The first approach, which would

bee in line with Pintzuk (1991, 1999), is to assume that the pronominal subjects in these

exampless are cliticized to the following elements, namely, symle in (30a) and purh graman

inn (30b). The second approach is to assume with Kiparsky (1995) that subject pronouns

aree (phonologically) cliticized to the preceding elements. This analysis can deal topic

initiall examples such as (30b), but cannot handle examples where pronominal subjects

occupyy initial position as in (30a). One could avoid this problem by assuming that subject

pronounss are clitics only when preceding elements exist and in such cases they are cliticized

too the right periphery of the preceding elements. In this analysis, the pronominal subject in

(29a)) is not a clitic, but the subject in (29b) is a clitic and cliticized to the preceding object.

Theree is a third way which I would like to take, and that is to assume that, differing from

finitee verbs in main clauses with inversion, which occupy the C position, finite verbs in

mainn clauses without inversion are within IP, probably in the I position of head-initial IP,

andd that pronominal subjects are cliticized to the empty C position as illustrated in (31).

(31)) a. [CP [c C-SUBp [n>.. . Vf... ]]]

b.. [CP XP [ c C-SUBp [ff . . . Vf . .. ]]]

(31a)) and (31b), respectively, correspond to (30a) and (30b).

Ann advantage of this analysis is that it presents a uniform approach to pronominal clitics

sincee in every context pronominal subjects are analyzed as cliticized to the right of C.

Itt should be noted that the validity of this approach depends on whether or not one can

presentt an adequate account for why topic elements in examples with pronominal subjects

doo not trigger V-to-C movement of finite verbs, which is illustrated in (31b). This is in

contrastt with examples with full NP subjects with topic elements, which usually show

inversion. .


5.. Conclusion

Inn this paper, I have argued that in main clauses with inversion and in subordinate clauses

pronominall subjects are to be analyzed as cliticized to the preceding C position. I have

alsoo suggested the possibility that this analysis can be extended to main clauses without

inversionn so that pronominal subjects are uniformly treated as being cliticized to the C

position. .

Notes s

*II am grateful to an anonymous reviewer for helpful comments on an earlier version of this

paper. .

1.. I do not enter into detailed discussions concerning the theoretical status of clitics here,

referringg the reader to Halpern (1995) and the references cited there.

2.. The reference systems of cited examples in the text are those adopted in the relevant

articles. .

3.. Van Kemenade does not give a clear label to the projection, but it seems that it is an

abbreviationn for "functional projection."

4.. In the examples cited from the first series of jElfric's Catholic Homilies, the page and

linee numbers of the edition are given.

Reference» »

Bammesberger,, Alfred

19922 "The place of English in Germanic and Indo-European," in: Richard M.

Hoggg (ed.), 26-66.

Battyee Adrian, and Ian Roberts

19955 Clause structure and language change. Oxford: Oxford University Press.


Chomsky,, Noam

19866 Barriers. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.

Halpern,, Aaron

19800 On the placement and morphology of clitics. Stanford: CSLI

Publications. .

Healey,, Antonette diPaolo and Venezky, Richard L.

19800 A microfiche concordance to Old English. Toronto: Dictionary of Old

Englishh Project.

Hogg,, Richard M.

19922 The Cambridge history of the English language, Vol. I. Cambridge:

Cambridgee University Press.

Hulk,, Aafke and Ans van Kemenade

19955 "Verb second, pro-drop, functional projections and language change,"

In:: Adrian Battye and Ian Roberts, 227-256.

Kato,, Kozo

19955 "The interjection la and subject pronouns in Old English," Linguistics

andand Philology 15: 23-40.

Kemenade,, Ans van

19877 Syntactic case and morphological case in the history of English.

Dordrecht:: Foris.

Kemenade,, Ans van.

19977 "V2 and embedded topicalization in Old and Middle English," In Ans

vann Kemenade and Nigel Vincent (eds.), 326-352.

Kemenade,, Ans van

19999 "Sentential negation and clause structure in Old English," In: Ingrid

Tieken-Boonn van Ostade, Gunnel Tottie, and Wim van der Wurff (eds.),

147-165. .

Kemenade,, Ans van and Nigel Vincent (eds.)

19977 Parameters of morphosyntactic change. Cambridge: Cambridge


Universityy Press.

Kiparsky,, Paul

19955 "Indo-European origins of Germanic syntax," in Adrian Battye and Ian

Robertss (eds.), 140-169.

Ohkado,, Masayuki.

20000 "Subordinate clauses in Old English," In Ken-ichi Takami, Akio Kamio,

andd John Whitman, 415-443.

Pintzuk,, Susan.

19911 Phrase Structures in Competition: Variation and Change in Old English

Wordd Order [Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, Published

byy Garland in 1999.]

Takami,, Ken-ichi, Akio Kamio, and John Whitman (eds.)

20000 Functional explorations in honor of Susumu Kuno. Tokyo: Kurosio

Publishers. .

Thorpe,, Benjamin.

18444 The homilies of the Anglo-Saxon church: The first part, containing the

sermoness catholici, or homilies of yElfric. London: iElfri c Society.

Tieken-Boonn van Ostade, Ingrid, Gunnel Tottie, and Wim van der Wurff (eds.)

19999 Negation in the history of English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

uva-dare (digital academic repository) clause structure in old … · on twam pingum hasfde god...

Documents